Since nobody uses the strat forum, and there is balance work to be done, why not start a thread for bringing up game issues you feel are imbalanced as far as strategy goes (not bugs, just tweaks to units/buildings).

The first issue I'd like to talk about is the health change. It was something Req has been toying with for a while, but by leaving the damage the same (and lowering the health) he has changed the game balance quite a bit. The ratios between units are roughly the same (with some significant changes), but the big problem I see here is indirect.

Ranged units have received a big buff with the lowering of hp. Why? Because they were always units that relied on their damage, not their hp, to get them through the fight. An all ranged army, particularly balista, can now do significant damage to opposing forces without much worry of them breaking through and doing damage. Just today I killed a 9 pop of scouts with my bali from maxed range; while I'm not complaining , I don't think that makes much balance sense.

On the other hand, one could argue bali and marks are a luxury now, and should be very powerful...we certainly can't build them indiscriminately like we used to. However, this is a buff even to the lowly archer, who has a much easier time taking out your damaging melee units before they can close the gap. Has this change made ranged units too much of a focal point in the game? They were always important, but now I think they dominate the battlefield more than proper balance would warrant.

If you agree, then what is a possible solution? Keeping their higher damage for low level troops, but giving higher level units some light ranged shielding (perhaps %10 reduction for second tear (stacking with squire ranged resistance) and %20 for third)? Historically ranged were great against rabbles of unorganized troops, but the better the troops and equipment the more ineffectual ranged units became. Perhaps arbs and marks could have a "bypass ranged resistance" feature (to lessen the late game dominance of balli).

Thoughts?

Is the online manual up to date so i can use that as a reference for talking here, but that is a good point the less hp the better the ranged. does this mean arbs now have enough hp to be useful??? lol


that actually doenst sound too bad, arbs were the killers of the plate.

maybe a tech to get? for all your troops?

I think that this will prolong the usefulness of the lower troops because of the lower costs, now pikes and squires are more valuable. while the higher guys like mace and falcs which were usually pretty close to showing up will take longer.

I think one thing this lower hp does do is increase the tactics of the game. You now are able to break lines easier or at least break a flank of the front row to get more of your units in, this should make the battles more ferocious but shorter.

Making combat faster is bad for battles. Battles are a test of skill when they are long and you can't easily obliterate a significant portion of your opponent's troops on the first turn, thus giving them no chance to fight back. Ranged being strong and units having low health make it a dance to see who can get a strong first hit, and then it may be pretty much over.

BloodBaron's ideas for changing the higher melee units to have some ranged resistance, and giving Marks and Arbs the ability to negate (or reduce) that resistance sounds like an awesome idea to help balance ranged in general and to make Balis more balanced (gotta choose between Balis and their range advantage and strength against lower units, or Marks and their better ability to damage higher units).

-Biodus-

The speed of combat is pretty dang important in TBS and if it had to change (not that it should) it should change to make it slower. How bad would it be to open your window to see your army dead? Making units die faster only makes first strike even more critical (ie. strike first or you lose) than it is now.

As far as buffing range via decreasing HP, range have recieved a nerf inasmuch as they copped a bit more of a loss compared to melee.

It's obvious that this new system needs at the very least a month of playtesting before balance can be reliably judged, unless something is incredibly and inexplainably broken.

The few things I've noticed is that the system practically neuters rushing an enemy, because the lesser amounts of units coupled with "insta-reinforcement" that he gets means not to mention some ridiculous defense mods means that rushing's days are numbered (with the obvious exception of rushing a person who has no army).

Some definite things I've noticed:

1) One thing I have to say: I like is the dynamic of being able to sell off your score in exchange for gold.

2) Techs have changed, especially in regards to weapons and armor techs: they now increment in +5 bonuses, with five increments. The cost starts at 2k gold, increasing in 1k increments. This rounds out the gamebreaking-ness of being one armor/weapons tech behind an opponent (though being two techs up in the new system is no less if not more devastating).

3) The four tiers of unit (Sword/Spear/Scout/Archer < Arb/Pike/Squire < Falch/Mace/Balli < Mark/Knight/HC) have been put down to three tiers, with maces upgraded to top tier and falchs demoted to second tier. This should, if all works, prevent the domination of HC with a same-tier rock counter available.

4) I think people should definitely consider keeping your high-level units alive and begin using Advanced Recruitment more, because of-

5) Units may now only be deployed in squads of ten, and they are expensive.

Q: Wood Panelling. What does it do now? Do you get a free 25% HP upgrade? If so, definitely a tech worth looking into.

Fliers have a tremendous advantage on the PG map ...
they can pick the map clean of resource piles due to being able to take short cuts over water.

Here's my answer to DG and Mikey to their posts in my thread in Questions.

You guys are not thinking clearly ...
please read each word until they cause a few synapses.

rex

marks are now even more dominate than before being the only 4th teir unit. battles will now be completely dominated by mace knights and alot of marksmen

To be honest, TR, that's a very good point that managed to escape me (the thought of Demons in campaign still sort of escapes me). Especially since the whole piles thing is still something that I'm getting used to (it's fairly unique to this game).

That's obviously an advantage, and it's probably not something Req intended. How about fliers being unable to takeover or destroy piles? I know you've got a vandetta against them apparently TR, but I'm guessing you would be slightly more comfortable with them if they were balanced.

As for mark domination, yes, perhap's that's true. But:
a) Range are weaker than their class.
b) Range cost more than their class.

So while eliminating marksmen has probably become the number 1 battlers' priority now, as far as imbalance goes, their incredibly prohibitive cost makes them a luxury. I mean, how many can you make in an average points battle?

between 5 and 6 is going to be the average i think that is about 2250 - 2700 in a 4k custom , that gives you plenty of room for like 3+ mace/nights, comms, and some fodder.


The thing is even if you get your pikes/ squires to them they dont too much, even your mace/knights/ HC went they get there wont put too big a dent in them.


all but maybe archers now from the low point and scouts for occasional retal you only want expert level and marks, as anything less, they dont do much, i had squires going up against mace, and they lost like 5 -7 only killing 1 each if you have those and a lot of marks you dont need much else exept maybe some nights to take care of other knights you encounter.

Last Edited : Sunday, 16 November 2008 - 00:00

no i thought more specials would come when req begins to balance all 3 of the types for camp play

other wise yeah i thought they are really laking in specials

hey what happened to the barb specials?!!

I think it was decided that the barbs had stronger troops, incredible defense due to protectors so that they would lose the special abilities in general. There may be some planned but that I can't say for sure.

Last Edited : Wednesday, 22 October 2008 - 23:30

I don't think they shouldn't get ANY specials, I think Req should continue doing what he did with demonic, introduce some new specials. I can imagine a suicide special, where theres a %5 (either on attack or melee def) that the unit kills itself and the unit it's attacking. Things like this just keep the game interesting. Perhaps, ideally, each race would have different specials but still ballance, like star craft.

defense skill? what's that worth? opp's army is facing you but you have an incredible defense...opp archers your protector and you no longer have a def, opp continues to slaughter...at least with a com it helps attack then has an option of stepping back a few hex's.

Last Edited : Sunday, 16 November 2008 - 00:00

Well, I agree with you Renno; the benefit of comms is you can move them up for your attack then move them back for theirs. With protectors they need to be in the thick of it to get the full benefit. We'll just have to see whether it's something players can work with or something that needs to be adjusted; I haven't played the new barbs enough to know.

i guess it will have to be used like the comms, having your comms near the front then fall back to your archers, this gives you the ability to not takke much casualties when you attack, maybe not do as much damage but not take casualties, also you can use that with your archers to take out their archers if in range

You should only have a small fraction of your troops take damage during the attack (usually ur soaking it w/ fodder), so the difference in effectiveness between Coms and Protectors is going to be significant.

To make them more even, you would need to give Protectors a greater effect range so they could stand farther back and protect more/further units from a somewhat safer location. Or you could decrease their price to make them even cost w/ commandeers (I was gonna suggest make them have a stronger effect, but that is already the case :p). Our you could give them like 75% ranged resistance as well so they could sit on the front lines and at least cost ur opponent more ranged shots than they would like to use.
Or some combination of the three.

-Biodus-

%75 ranged resistance on top of their def is really a bit too much don't you think? With the new system fodder is less available, so they are viable on attack (and can still protect your ranged units from other ranged). I'm thinking you can use a number of them, put them in defense mode, and focus your first attacks on taking out their ranged units. Unless they have a good number of balista that you can't get to your protectors should be fairly safe.

Just to clarify, by give 75% ranged resistance, I just meant give the Protector itself (not the units it affects) the ranged resistance.

-Biodus-